Upload
sardar-vallabhbhai-patel-university-of-agriculture-technology-meerut-up-india
View
767
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
COURSE SEMINAR COURSE SEMINAR ONON
RESPONSE OF BIOFERTILIZER IN PULSE PRODUCTIONRESPONSE OF BIOFERTILIZER IN PULSE PRODUCTION
2014
Thaneshwar
DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMYSARDAR VALLABHBHAI PATEL UNIVERSITY OF AGRI. & TECH. MEERUT (UP)-250110
I.D. NO. PG-2657/13
Speaker
Ph.D Agronomy
INTRODUCTION India is the world’s largest producer, consumer and
importer of pulses.(Reddy et al., 2012) India accounts for 33% of the world area and 22% of
the world production of pulses. About 90% of the global pigeonpea, 65% of chickpea
and 37% of lentil area falls in India, corresponding to 93%, 68% and 32% of global production, respectively (FAOSTAT, 2011).
In India total pulses were grown on an area of 23.47 m ha with production of 18.44 mt and productivity 786 kg/ha in year 2012-13(Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India).
DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT PULSES TO TOTAL PULSE AREA IN INDIA
Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11
STATEWISE % SHARE IN TOTAL AREA OF PULSES IN INDIA
,2010-11
STATEWISE SHARE IN PRODUCTION OF PULSES
,2010-11
Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11
Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11
Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11
BIOFERTILIZER
Biofertilizer are the microbial inoculation which are capable of mobilizing nutritive elements required for the plants by fixing atmospheric nitrogen, solubilizing and enhancing uptake of soil phosphorus.
History of biofertilizers The commercial history of Biofertilizers
began with the launch of ‘Nitragin’ by Nobbe and Hiltner, a laboratory culture of Rhizobia in 1895.
In India the first study on legume Rhizobium symbiosis was conducted by N. V. Joshi and the first commercial production started as early as 1956.
ADVANTAGES OF BIOFERTILIZER
•PSB biofertilizer can provide 12-20 kg P2O5/ha/season.•Some biofertilizer add considerable amount of atmospheric nitrogen in soil.•Mycorrhiza can provide adequate, P, other micro nutrients and help in increased water absorption.•Mixed biofertilizer give better impact.•Keep soils biologically active.•Help in soil health maintenance.
HOW BIO-FERTILIZERS ARE COST EFFECTIVE!
Quantity of bio-fertilizer
Equivalent quantity of
chemical fertilizersSavings in Chemical Nutrients
1 mt- RHIZOBIUM 100-400 mt Urea 50-200 mt of “N” (Minimum fixation of 50 kg. /ha)
1mt-PSM 100 mt DAP 40-50 mt Of “P”(Minimum Solubilisation of 40 kg/ha of “P2O5” )
Table-1: Economics of Bio-fertilizers
Source: A book on Bio-fertilizer for extension workers, Bhattacharya & Mishra
CLASSIFICATION OF BIOFERTILIZERS
Biofertilizers
N-Fixing Biofertilizer (NBF)
PO43- Mobilizing
Biofertilizer(PSB)
Cellulolytic or Organic matter Decomposer(OMD)
NBF ForLegumese.g.,Rhizobium
NBFForCerealse.g.,Azotobacter,Azospirillum,Azolla,BGA
PO43-
Solubilizer
e.g.,
Bacillus,
Pseudomonas,
Aspergillus
PO43-
Absorber
e.g.,
VA- mycorrhiza
VAM like –
Glomus
CellulolyticOrganism e.g.,Cellulomonas,TrichodermaSpore
LingolyticOrganisme.g.,ArthrobacterAgariccus
BIOFERTILIZERS FOR PULSE CROPS
1) Rhizobium2) Phosphorus Solubilising Bacteria (PSB)3) Vesicular Arboscular Mycorrhiza (VAM)4) Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria
(PGPR)
RHIZOBIUMIt is aerobic bacteria fixes atmospheric
nitrogen in legumes symbiotically.The bacteria infect the legume root and form
root nodules within which they reduce molecular nitrogen to ammonia.
It has been estimated that 40-250 kg N/ha/year is fixed by different legume crops by the microbial activities of Rhizobium.
The rhizobium legume association yield increase by 10-30%.
Rhizobium nodule on legume root
RHIZOBIUM SPECIES SUITABLE FOR DIFFERENT CROPS
Sr. No. Rhizobium sp. Crops
1 R. leguminosarum Pea, Lentil,Vicia,
2 R. trifoli Berseem
3 R. phaseoli Beans
4 R. lupini Lupinus, Ornithopus
5 R. japonicum Soybean, cowpea, groundnut
6 R. meliloti Melilotus(sweet clover), Lucerne
Source-Katyayan, Arun., Fundamentals of Agriculture,Vol. 1
Amount of nitrogen fixed by important legume crops
Sr. No. Crops N fixed (kg/ha)
1 Pigeonpea 200
2. Alfalfa(Lucerne) 194
3. White clover 103
4. Cowpeas 90
5. Vetch 80
6. Peas 72
7. Soybean 58
8. Beans 40
Source-Katyayan, Arun., Fundamentals of Agriculture,Vol. 1
Table 2: Effect of inoculation of soybean cv. PK-416 with rhizobial strains on
S.No. Strains
Shoot dry weight(g plant-1 ) Stover
yield (g plant-1 )
Grain yield No. of pods
(plant-1 )
Pod dry weight (g
per plant )40 DAS 60 DAS g plant-1 Q ha-1
1. SB-6 9.70 17.40 18.23 18.50 21.38 108.77 30.77
2. SB-12 12.17 20.53 25.83 19.43 22.21 113.70 32.23
3. SB-16 13.10 22.20 27.23 21.67 23.00 116.03 33.87
4. SB-120 10.33 16.93 17.40 16.80 18.93 105.77 27.43
5. SB-294 10.47 20.33 22.30 18.33 21.69 105.33 31.67
6. SB-102 12.83 21.27 14.70 18.77 16.32 100.43 25.10
7. SB-271 13.07 17.40 20.20 19.47 18.51 103.57 26.80
8. SB-243 10.57 15.23 16.67 17.33 16.67 109.87 26.43
9. SB-9 11.57 20.33 16.53 18.23 17.22 99.57 25.33
10. Control 9.57 14.77 16.10 14.90 16.21 101.20 23.23
Mean 11.34 18.64 19.52 18.34 19.21 106.42 28.29
C.D. (P=0.05)
1.13 3.93 3.73 2.97 2.14 10.25 3.01
growth and yield (Mean of two years)
Source- Patra et. al.,2012
Table 3: Effect of inoculation of soybean cv. PK-416 with rhizobial strains on N uptake by plant at different stages and post-harvest soil N (Mean of two years)
Sl. No.
Strains
N uptake by plant (mg per plant )Efficiency
ratio of strains at 60 DAS
Post- harvest
total soil N (%)
40 DAS 60 DAS Harvest
Shoot Shoot Stover Grain Total
1. SB-6 239.3 455.3 190.3 1121.7 1312.0 1.542 0.096
2. SB-12 296.7 558.7 339.3 1215.0 1554.3 1.892 0.097
3. SB-16 348.7 563.0 311.7 1352.3 1664.0 1.906 0.099
4. SB-120 240.7 469.0 175.7 1013.0 1188.7 1.588 0.092
5. SB-294 268.3 438.7 236.3 1113.0 1349.3 1.486 0.091
6. SB-102 336.0 492.7 169.3 1204.3 1373.6 1.668 0.092
7. SB-271 279.3 479.7 208.3 1234.7 1443.0 1.624 0.093
8. SB-243 249.0 369.3 188.7 1099.3 1288.0 1.251 0.095
9. SB-9 278.0 473.7 188.7 1123.0 1311.7 1.604 0.093
10. Control 195.3 295.3 161.0 927.7 1088.7 0.080
Mean 273.1 459.5 216.9 1140.4 1357.3 0.093
C.D. (P=0.05)
39.9 142.1 75.2 199.3 174.0 0.005Source- Patra et. al., 2012
A group of heterotrophic moss are known to have the ability to solubilize inorganic phosphorus from insoluble source.
Bacteria- Bacillus spp., Pseudomonas spp.Fungi- Aspergillus spp., Penicillium spp., Trichoderma spp.Yeast- Pchwamiomyces occidentails
The phosphate solubilizers also produce fungi static and growth promoting substances which influence plant growth.PSB can be used for all crops including paddy, millets, oilseeds, pulses and vegetables.
PSB culture
Table 4. Balance sheet of P (Kg/ ha) as influenced by integrated nutrient management in kabuli chickpea
Treatment
Initial soil P status (a) P added
(b)
P uptake by crop (c)
Soil P status after harvest
(d)
Actual gain/ lossover initial status P=(a-d)
P Balance (a+b)-(c+d)
2005-06
2006-07
2005-06
2006-07
2005-06
2006-07
2005-06
2006-07
2005-06
2006-07
2005-06
2006-07
Control 10.4 10.6 0.0 0.0 21.5 22.3 10.0 10.2 -0.4 -0.4 -21.1 -21.9
PSB 10.4 10.6 0.0 0.0 21.7 26.2 10.7 10.4 0.3 -0.2 -22.0 -26.1
FYM (5t/ha) 10.4 10.6 2.6 2.6 21.0 26.4 11.0 11.4 -0.6 0.8 -19.0 -24.5
FYM + PSB 10.4 10.6 2.6 2.6 24.1 31.7 11.7 11.6 -1.3 1.0 -22.8 -30.1
P 12.9 kg/ha 10.4 10.6 12.9 12.9 26.3 28.3 11.4 10.3 -1.0 -0.3 -14.4 -15.2
P 12.9 kg/ ha +PSB 10.4 10.6 12.9 12.9 27.5 31.2 11.5 11.5 -1.1 0.9 -15.7 -19.1
P 12.9 kg/ha +FYM 10.4 10.6 15.5 15.5 27.9 30.6 12.0 11.9 -1.6 1.3 -14.0 -16.5
P 12.9 kg/ha + FYM+ PSB
10.4 10.6 15.5 15.5 31.0 33.6 12.7 12.30 -2.3 1.7 -17.8 -19.8
P 25.8 kg/ha 10.4 10.6 25.8 25.8 27.7 30.6 12.2 11.40 -1.8 0.8 -3.7 -5.6
P 25.8 kg/ha + PSB 10.4 10.6 25.8 25.8 28.6 31.2 12.7 12.30 -2.3 1.7 -5.1 -7.1
P 25.8 kg/ha+FYM 10.4 10.6 28.4 28.4 28.3 36.5 12.9 12.90 -2.5 2.3 -2.4 -10.4
P 25.8 kg/ha+ FYM+ PSB
10.4 10.6 28.4 28.4 30.5 37.7 13.3 13.3 -2.9 2.7 -5.0 -12.0
CD (P=0.05) 4.9 5.6 0.5 0.5 0.5
Source- Tanwar et al., 2010
Table 5. Growth attributes, yield attributes and yield of chickpea as influenced by phosphorus and PSB (Mean of two years)
TreatmentPlant height (cm)
Dry matter
accumulation (g/ plant)
No. of branches
/ plant
Days to
50% flower
ing
Pods/ plant
100 seed weight
(g)
Seeds yield (kg./h
a)
Harvest index
(%)
Phosphorus (kg P2O5/ ha)
0 52.2 15.1 5.8 73.8 16.5 23.0 1408.5 25.930 53.3 15.4 5.9 75.6 22.4 25.8 1624.5 28.260 56.9 16.5 6.3 76.4 26.3 27.4 1765.5 31.1
C.D. (P= 0.05) 2.74 0.8 0.33 1.20 0.92 0.73 78.0 0.79
PSBControl 52.4 15.2 5.8 74.0 20.9 24.7 1556.0 27.8
Inoculated 55.8 16.2 6.2 76.2 22.7 26.1 1643.0 29.0C.D. (P=
0.05) 2.24 0.65 0.27 1.10 0.75 0.6 63.5 0.64
Source-Thenua and Sharma (2011)
SI No.
Treatments
Nodule number/ plant
Dry wt. (mg)/ plant
Plant height (cm)
Dry wt./
plant at 45 DAS (g)
Plot Pl. dry wt. (kg)
Yield (kg/ha)
1 Uninoculated control 6.93 18.40 46.00 2.54 2.33 859
2. RDF (20:50 NP kg/ha) 4.93 24.87 42.67 3.04 3.17 1157
3. RDF + (Rh+PSB) 6.53 34.40 59.33 3.67 3.43 1208
4. Compost (10 t/ha) 7.53 33.17 60.67 3.58 3.33 1033
5. Compost + (Rh+PSB) 8.53 31.53 70.00 3.51 3.50 1054
6. RDF (50%) + compost (2.5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)
10.07 33.87 65.33 3.80 3.90 1111
7. RDF (50%) + compost (5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)
11.27 37.73 69.33 4.59 4.37 1265
8. RDF (25%) + compost (5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)
11.80 35.40 72.67 3.64 3.63 1219
CD at 5% 1.72 5.16 8.41 0.51 0.43 182
Table 6. Integrated nutrient management with biofertilizers in pigeonpea
Source- Patil et al.,2004
under rainfed situations
TreatmentNo. of pods per
plant (g)
1000 seed
weight
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
Haulm yieid kg/ha B:C ratio
Organic manures (OM)OM1: Compost @ 5 t ha-1
OM2: FYM @ 5 t ha-1
C.D. at 5%
63.8660.65NS
19.9819.61NS
19911923NS
31633079NS
3.183.08NS
Levels of rock phosphate(RP) with PSB
RP1: 50 kg rock phosphate ha-1
RP2: 100 kg rock phosphate ha-1
RP3: 150 kg rock phosphate ha-1
RP4: 200 kg rock phosphate ha-1
C.D. at 5%
57.7261.2963.7766.225.59
19.0519.2720.3920.480.70
1775188020692104172
2930304732543255NS
2.883.023.303.320.25
Table 7. Effect of organic manures and rock phosphate with PSB on yield and
Source- Patil et al., 2011
yield attributes, B:C ratio of chickpea (Pooled data)
Interaction No. of pods per plant (g)
1000 seed
weight
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
Haulm yieid kg/ha
B:C ratio
OM1RP1
OM1RP2
OM1RP3
OM1RP4
OM2RP1
OM2RP2
OM2RP3
OM2RP4
Absolute controlC.D. at 5%
58.9563.0065.7167.7656.4959.5861.8364.6848.977.52
19.2119.4220.6020.7118.8919.1220.1820.2518.920.93
180319112120213017471849201720791450229
296930913292330028903003321532102597398
2.933.073.373.362.832.973.223.282.800.34
………..Continued
Source- Patil et al.,2011
VAM, a fungus, colonize the plant root system and increase the growth and yield of crop
Produce growth-promoting substances
Increase nutrient uptake particularly P, Zn and other micronutrients.
We can save 50% Phosphatic fertilizer without affecting the yield.
VAM inoculation improves water relation of the plants
.
VAM
Table 8. Effect of dual inoculation of Glomus fasciculatum (VAM) and Rhizobium on the chlorophyll, nitrogen and phosphorus contents of pigeon pea.
Microbial Inoculants Chlorophyll Content (mg/g) N (%) P (%)
Uninoculated Control 2.47 3.04 0.98
Rhizobium 2.81 3.18 1.87
VAM 2.85 3.26 2.03
VAM + Rhizobium 2.94 3.34 2.1
CD ( p = 0.05 ) 0.03 1.02 0.02
Source- Bhattacharjee and Sharma (2012)
Varieties
Pod length (cm) 100-seed weight (g) Pod yield per plant (g) Pod yield (t/ha)
V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean
B1 11.68 14.06 11.96 12.56 25.68 29.88 26.51 27.35 50.48 65.14 53.62 56.41 4.487 5.790 4.765 5.014
B2 12.87 15.64 14.93 14.48 28.28 33.75 32.28 31.43 59.62 79.00 72.62 70.41 5.300 7.023 6.455 6.260
B3 14.45 16.17 15.23 15.28 30.58 34.77 33.02 32.80 66.93 81.86 76.00 74.93 5.950 7.277 6.755 6.660
B4 12.36 14.78 13.72 13.62 27.41 31.41 29.10 29.30 55.81 69.43 62.20 62.48 4.960 6.171 5.528 5.553
Mean 12.84 15.16 13.96 27.98 32.45 30.22 58.21 73.86 66.11 5.174 6.565 5.875
SEm±
C.D. (5%)
SEm± C.D. (5%)
SEm±
C.D. (5%)
SEm± C.D. (5%)
BVB x V
0.0450.0390.066
0.0930.0810.137
0.1680.1450.291
0.3480.3020.603
0.4210.3650.730
0.8740.7571.514
0.0640.0560.111
0.1330.1150.231
V1 : Arka Komal B1 : 25% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1
V2 : Arka Suvidha B2 : 50% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1
V3 : Selection-9 B3 : 75% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1
B4 : 100% RDF only (Control)
Source-Ramana et al., 2011
Table 9: Pod length (cm), 100-seed weight (g), Pod yield per plant (g), and Pod yield per hectare (t/ha) of french bean as influenced by soil application of VAM and PSB.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR)
• This group of bacteria colonize roots or rhizosphere soil.
• These PGPR are referred to as biostimulants and the phytohormones as they produce indole-acetic acid, cytokinins, gibberellins and inhibitors of ethylene production.
• Some common examples of are Pseudomonas, Burkholdaria, Enterobacter, Erwinia, Mycobacterium, Mesorhizobium, Flavobacterium, etc.
Table 10. Inoculation effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on grain yield, biomass, dry weight and nitrogen and phosphorus uptake by grains of chickpea
S.No. Treatments Grain yield (kg ha-1)
Biomass (kg ha-1)
N yield (kg ha-1)
P yield (kg ha-1)
1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.
10.11.12.13.14.15.16.
UninoculatedAzos.Azot.MesorhizobiumPseudomonasAzos.+Azot.Azos.+M.Azos.+P.Azot.+M.Azot.+P.M.+P.Azos.+Azot.+M.Azos.+Azot.+P.Azos.+M.+P.Azot.+M.+P.Azos.+Azot.+M.+P.
543.9826.8797.1772.5739.3877.2751.8781.1835.3697.5689.9818.6910.6864.0847.5743.3
1082.31609.31549.41514.41445.81695.81493.11509.61629.41427.81340.81621.81845.81705.61665.31442.8
14.4927.8528.6027.0522.1727.0524.5320.3227.5321.9722.9625.4029.7826.6025.2822.10
2.0883.2523.1682.8902.7473.4592.8693.1323.1422.9633.0173.1473.6063.2773.1513.016
Selected group comparisons
Azospirillum- cotaining versusNon Azospirillum -containing treatments
Significant at 1% probability level
Significant at 1% probability level
Azotobacter-containing versus non Azotobacter-containing treatments
Significant at 1% probability level
Significant at 1% probability level
Mesorhizobium-containing versus non Mesorhizobium-containing treatments
NS NS
Pseudomonas-containingversus non Pseudomonas-containing treatments
NS NS
Source-Asad and Vafa (2011)
How Bio-fertilizer are applied to crops
Methods of biofertilizer application
Soil treatment Seed treatment
Soil Treatment
For each hectare area four kilogram each of the recommended biofertilizers is mixed in 200 kg of compost and kept overnight.This mixture is incorporated in the soil at the time of sowing or planting.
Source-Indian Society of Soil Science, Fundamental of Soil Science
SEED TREATMENT Rate of application
o Nitrogenous bio-fertilizer-200 gm./10 kg. seed
o Phosphate bio-fertilizer-200 gm./10 kg. seed
o Liquid biofertilizer-3 ml /lit. water (seeds are to be dipped in the solution
Seedling root deepo For rice crop, a bed is made in
the field and filled with water .Recommended biofertilizers are mixed in this water and the roots of seedlings are dipped for minimum ½ an hour before transplanting.
Application of Biofertilizer on seed
Chickpea seeds before (left) and after (right)treatment with biofertilizer
Table 11. Yield attributes and grain yield of soyabean as influenced by application of phoshphorus with and without PSB, RI and VAM (Pooled mean of three years)
Treatment Pods/plant
Seeds yield/
plant (g)
100 seed
weight (g)
Seed Yield (t/ha)Straw
yield (t/ ha)2005 2006 2007 Mean
No P application 49 11.7 11.3 1.89 2.80 2.41 2.37 2.99
30 kg P2O5/ha through rock phosphate(RP)
56 14.8 12.3 2.00 3.11 2.62 2.58 3.28
60 kg P2O5/ha through RP 63 17.4 12.8 2.66 3.36 2.73 2.92 3.88
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB 57 15.5 12.3 1.95 3.18 2.66 2.60 3.36
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI 59 16.0 12.3 1.93 3.21 2.69 2.61 3.43
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+VAM 60 15.8 12.5 2.03 3.29 2.70 2.67 3.50
30 kgP2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI 64 17.0 13.0 2.13 3.41 2.88 2.81 3.75
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+VAM
67 17.1 13.2 2.52 3.49 2.80 2.94 3.75
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI+VAM 67 17.2 12.6 2.21 3.48 2.89 2.86 3.89
30 kgP2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM
70 18.8 13.7 2.56 3.67 3.02 3.08 4.08
CD (P=0.05) 7 1.4 0.6 NS 0.20 0.33 - 0.32
Source- Sarawgi et al., 2011
TreatmentTotal
cost (× 103 / ₹ha)
Net profit (×
103 / ₹ha)
B:C ratio
Rhizobium / g of soil (× 105)
PSB/ g of soil (× 105)
No P application 10.3 19.8 1.92 - -
30 kg P2O5/ha through rock phosphate (RP) 11.0 21.6 1.97 1.22 0.35
60 kg P2O5/ha through RP 11.6 25.2 2.17 1.28 0.44
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB 11.0 21.8 1.99 1.25 0.63
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI 11.0 22.0 2.00 1.48 0.44
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+VAM 11.1 22.6 2.02 1.25 0.43
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI 11.0 24.5 2.23 1.54 0.67
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+VAM 11.2 25.8 2.31 1.36 0.64
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI+VAM 11.2 25.0 2.23 1.50 0.45
30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM 11.2 27.7 2.48 1.58 0.74
CD (P=0.05) - 2.6 - 0.15 0.07
Table 12. Economics of soyabean and microbial population in soil after soyabean harvest as influenced by application of phosphorus with and without PSB, Rhizobium and VAM (Pooled mean of three years)
Source- Sarawgi et al., 2011
What precautions one should take for using biofertilizers?
Biofertilizer packets need to be stored in cool and dry place away from direct sunlight and heat.
Right combinations of biofertilizers have to be used. As Rhizobium is crop specific, one should use for the
specified crop only. Other chemicals should not be mixed with the biofertilizers. The packet has to be used before its expiry, only for the
specified crop and by the recommended method of application.
It is highly beneficial to use biofertilizers along with organic manures.
Limitations of biofertilizers
Non availability of quality biofertilizers.Short shelf life.Improper inoculation.Adverse climatic conditions like waterlogging,
high temperature and salinity and acidity of soil.
Poor AcceptabilityPoor Acceptability among farmers may be attributed to :a. Inconsistent responsesb. Poor quality of carrier based productsc. Sensitivity to temperature and short shelf lifed. Non-compatibility with chemical seed dressers/
fertilizerse. Poor organic carbon in soilsf. Dependence for supply on Government system
Increase crop productivity through balanced use of fertilizers
Use of balanced inorganic fertilizers, organic fertilizers and biofertilizers can provide viable leverage to increase crop productivity.
It enrich the soil with important nutrients.Biofertilizers has potential to generate
additional income to farmers from the same size of land.
FUTURE NEEDSIt is necessary to develop strains of
bacteria suitable for different crops in different agroclimatic condition and soil types to fully harness the benefit from the biofertilizers.
There is need to put in greater effort to achieve better quality of inoculants by making necessary arrangements in storage and transport.
Rhizobium strain SB-16 in soyabean increases grain yield by 41.88% and stover yield by 69.10% over control beside increased N uptake.Application of 30 kg. P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM in soyabean increases seed yield to maximum (30.6%), increases microbial activity and higher net returns. Dual inoculation of VAM and Rhizobium found better for pigeonpea crop.The application of 60 kg P2O5/ha inoculated with PSB recorded the highest value of all yield parameters in chickpea.
CONCLUSION
Use Biofertilizers For Healthy and living soil